If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

By Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) - Fliers may have a tough time recovering damages for invasive screenings at U.S. airport security checkpoints, after a federal appeals court on Wednesday said screeners are immune from claims under a federal law governing assaults, false arrests and other abuses.

In a 2-1 vote, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screeners are shielded by government sovereign immunity from liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act because they do not function as "investigative or law enforcement officers."

The majority said it was "sympathetic" to concerns that its decision would leave fliers with "very limited legal redress" for alleged mistreatment by aggressive or overzealous screeners, which add to the ordinary stresses of air travel.
"For most people, TSA screenings are an unavoidable feature of flying," but it is "squarely in the realm" of Congress to expand liability for abuses, Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause wrote.

The decision, the first on the issue by a federal appeals court, was a defeat for Nadine Pellegrino, a business consultant from Boca Raton, Florida.
She and her husband had sued for false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution over a July 2006 altercation at Philadelphia International Airport.
Pellegrino on Wednesday said she was reviewing the decision. A lawyer who helped with her appeal did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

According to court papers, Pellegrino had been randomly selected for additional screening at the Philadelphia airport before boarding a US Airways flight to Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Pellegrino, then 57, objected to the invasiveness of the search, but conditions deteriorated and she was later jailed for about 18 hours, the papers show. Criminal charges were filed, and Pellegrino was acquitted at a March 2008 trial.
Circuit Judge Thomas Ambro dissented from Wednesday's decision.
"By analogizing TSA searches to routine administrative inspections, my colleagues preclude victims of TSA abuses from obtaining any meaningful remedy for a variety of intentional tort claims," he wrote.

Torts are civil wrongs that can result in damages.
A spokesman for U.S. Attorney William McSwain in Philadelphia, whose office represented TSA officials, had no immediate comment.

The appeals court ruled 11 months after throwing out a First Amendment claim by an architect, Roger Vanderklok, who said he was arrested in retaliation for asking to file a complaint against an ill-tempered TSA supervisor.
The case is Pellegrino et al v U.S. Transportation Security Administration et al, 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 15-3047.

"Dark and difficult times lie ahead. Soon we will all face the choice between what is right, and what is easy."Dumbledore to Harry Potter, Goblet of Fire.

Luke 21:36

A people who no longer recognize sin and evil, are not a people who will recognize tyranny and despotism either.Invar

“During the course of your life you will find that things are not always fair. You will find that things happen to you that you do not deserve and that are not always warranted. But you have to put your head down and fight, fight, fight. Never, ever, ever give up!”

The wonder of our time isn’t how angry we are at politics and politicians; it’s how little we’ve done about it. - Fran Porretto
-http://bastionofliberty.blogspot.com/2016/10/a-wholly-rational-hatred.html

It's high time this was addressed in Congress. The TSA hasn't stopped any potential jihadis in a LONG TIME. They could still provide security while backing off the more invasive security search functions... but YES, that might require profiling. It's either that or let the airlines handle this on their own - and let the consumer choose who they'll do business with.

FRAN˘
✔
@AJFrancis410
Hey you pieces of shit at @TSA next time you assholes feel the need to go thru my mother’s ashes for no reason, make sure you close it back so her remains aren’t spilled on all my clothes... the least you pieces of garbage can do is your ****ing job

4:31 AM - Jul 9, 2018
10.6K
5,250 people are talking about this

Carrie Leanne Francis died on June 26 at the age of 46, according to ESPN.

“Our officers are trained to handle your carry-on and checked property with care,” the message continued. “Out of respect for the deceased, under no circumstances should the container be opened.”

Since it appeared that someone had opened the container of ashes Francis put in his checked baggage, TSA said it would investigate further.

AskTSA
✔
@AskTSA
Replying to @mister42 @AJFrancis410
1: We're very sorry to hear about this. We understand the emotional stress travelers are under when transporting the remains of a loved one. Our policies and procedures focus on ensuring that all passengers are treated with dignity, respect and courtesy.

FRAN˘
✔
@AJFrancis410
· 9 Jul
The craziest part of this @TSA shit is that I dont even care that they checked it... they were just being cautious, & I can understand that.

But to not ensure that it won’t spill back into my bag after you put it back in is the most asinine & irresponsible shit I have ever seen.

AskTSA
✔
@AskTSA
We want to look further into this. Please let us know which airport you traveled through, as well as the airline and flight information.

1:36 PM - Jul 9, 2018
See AskTSA's other Tweets

In a statement to HuffPost on Tuesday, TSA said a video review showed that Francis’ checked bag was searched for an unidentified object at Los Angeles International Airport.

“A TSA officer discovered the unidentified object was an opened, unmarked ceramic container, wrapped in aluminum foil inside a small bag,” the statement continued. “The TSA officer completed screening of the checked bag, clearing it to continue to its destination. The container was carefully repacked and placed in the bag.”

The agency also said it recommends taking cremated human remains in carry-on baggage, but each airline has specific requirements that can be difficult for travelers to accommodate after the death of a loved one.

When a follower asked Francis why he put the ashes in a checked bag, he said Delta Airlines required a death certificate, which was still in the mail to him. The length of time required to obtain a death certificate varies by state, but it can take multiple days to several weeks to receive.

On its website, Delta states that a death or cremation certificate is required to put remains in carry-on luggage. Along with TSA, the airline suggests travelers put the remains in a wood or plastic container, which can be easily X-rayed.

“TSA is not allowed to open the container under any circumstance. You can check cremated remains, as long as they pass through security screening,” the site adds.

Francis tweeted that he was not interested in speaking to the media about the incident because it’s upsetting and still raw. He continued to blast TSA for spilling the remains, saying he was not upset that his bag was inspected, but that the container was not replaced properly so its contents would not spill.

FRAN˘
✔
@AJFrancis410
The craziest part of this @TSA shit is that I dont even care that they checked it... they were just being cautious, & I can understand that.

But to not ensure that it won’t spill back into my bag after you put it back in is the most asinine & irresponsible shit I have ever seen.

John R Wersan Jr
@JwersanJr
· 9 Jul
Replying to @AJFrancis410
So @AskTSA @TSA Who's going to be FIRED for messing with the cremains? If they violated your explicit rules, and desecrated the cremains, they should be terminated ASAP!

FRAN˘
✔
@AJFrancis410
I don’t even want anyone fired... that person made a stupid mistake but they have a family too. I just want TSA to be cognizant if it’s own internal idiocy

It's high time this was addressed in Congress. The TSA hasn't stopped any potential jihadis in a LONG TIME. They could still provide security while backing off the more invasive security search functions... but YES, that might require profiling. It's either that or let the airlines handle this on their own - and let the consumer choose who they'll do business with.

But this is only ONE issue I have with flying these days.

This would have been the better way to set up the pre-screening/security operations, from the start - NO government-controlled TSA entity or direct involvement - let the airlines handle it (after all, they have significant skin in the game) and let consumers decide who they may wish to fly with - or, not.

Some might argue that by not having a TSA-type function under the strict control of the FedGov, and instead, leaving the security function to private enterprise/individual airlines, would allow/ecourage the bad folks to sneak-attack more easily - one way, or another. Don't believe this to be the case, IMHO.

Another point - disgusted customers would have a much easier time of taking effective legal action against overly aggressive private, airline-run security operations versus the FedGov-TSA.

intothegoodnight

"Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

In a 2-1 vote, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screeners are shielded by government sovereign immunity from liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act because they do not function as "investigative or law enforcement officers."

When TSA started years ago, I would often ask the agent if they were LEOs. Mostly they would say yes, which was illegal- impersonating an officer.

And the Gestapo were not LEOs or investigators either. They were neighborly consultants for national security.

Deo adjuvante non timendum - With God Helping, Nothing is to be Feared
"You are like a pit-bull..." - Dennis Olson
"No man knows but that the last backward glance over his shoulder may be his last look, forever." - Ernie Pyle Born: 1900 KIA: 1945 Shima, Okinawa

Can't... They may have an impeccable record, so far but, HORRORS, they profile!

Deo adjuvante non timendum - With God Helping, Nothing is to be Feared
"You are like a pit-bull..." - Dennis Olson
"No man knows but that the last backward glance over his shoulder may be his last look, forever." - Ernie Pyle Born: 1900 KIA: 1945 Shima, Okinawa

Deo adjuvante non timendum - With God Helping, Nothing is to be Feared
"You are like a pit-bull..." - Dennis Olson
"No man knows but that the last backward glance over his shoulder may be his last look, forever." - Ernie Pyle Born: 1900 KIA: 1945 Shima, Okinawa

I'm pretty sure they are acting on the property manager's behalf ( could be wrong ) but that does give security officers limited powers....

Deo adjuvante non timendum - With God Helping, Nothing is to be Feared
"You are like a pit-bull..." - Dennis Olson
"No man knows but that the last backward glance over his shoulder may be his last look, forever." - Ernie Pyle Born: 1900 KIA: 1945 Shima, Okinawa

Recently flew to Florida, and back, visiting family. Leave from Burlington, and arrive at an even smaller airport in FL. I find TSA to be pretty benign, and friendly when there is only 3 or 4 of them in the whole place.

The word RACIST, and the ability to debate race-related issues rationally, are the kryptonite of white common sense.

If that's true, what right do they have to go through luggage, pull people aside for more thorough screening, or detain people?

They operate by YOUR consent. If you try to fight it, they point out that the airport is a private entity with rules and by entering it you comply with and agree with the rules. If you decide not to, you are not required to and you will not use the airport. So you take your choice- comply or you will not pass through.

They operate by YOUR consent. If you try to fight it, they point out that the airport is a private entity with rules and by entering it you comply with and agree with the rules. If you decide not to, you are not required to and you will not use the airport. So you take your choice- comply or you will not pass through.

For my 2000th post.......

I agree that their business, their rules, but if they can search your luggage and detain you for the police, they have the same effect as law enforcement and should be held to similar standards. The appeals court got it wrong. If you are detained, either you have been arrested or kidnapped. Their are no alternatives. To me it is a very black and white situation.

NOTICE: Timebomb2000 is an Internet forum for discussion of world events and personal disaster preparation. Membership is by request only. The opinions posted do not necessarily represent those of TB2K Incorporated (the owner of this website), the staff or site host. Responsibility for the content of all posts rests solely with the Member making them. Neither TB2K Inc, the Staff nor the site host shall be liable for any content.

All original member content posted on this forum becomes the property of TB2K Inc. for archival and display purposes on the Timebomb2000 website venue. Said content may be removed or edited at staff discretion. The original authors retain all rights to their material outside of the Timebomb2000.com website venue. Publication of any original material from Timebomb2000.com on other websites or venues without permission from TB2K Inc. or the original author is expressly forbidden.

"Timebomb2000", "TB2K" and "Watching the World Tick Away" are Service Mark℠ TB2K, Inc. All Rights Reserved.